garybelton wrote:The CCT tournament currently has excellent rules, here are my suggestions for five new CCT rules with the intention of improving the event:
1) There should be a unique book author per engine per CCT
2) Maximum depth in opening book after which the engine must start moving, unaided by book = 10 full moves
3) Hardware and engine software should be in your finger notes
4) Extend allowed disconnection period to 10 minutes
5) All parties should conduct themselves in a sportsmanlike manner, at all times
On 2, let someone else like Sedat run a book tournament or go to the playchess engine room for it. Failure to comply with 2,3,5 should result in immediate ejection of the participant from the tournament. 1 can't be measured so you would have to rely on the honesty of the players. But at the end of the day, you'll get the tournament you want of course, so I encourage everyone who plays in and enjoys watching CCT to contribute ideas.
That's a long story...and i doubt that ever the above conditions (in a such online important tournament) will be in reality
But anyway if we will allow a rule- same move book limit for all engines,then all engines must be run on identical hardware speed too
For example here are available a few tournaments,where the opening books and hardware speed play a very important role:
But anyway if we will allow a rule- same move book limit for all engines,then all engines must be run on identical hardware speed too
I don't think that one follows the other and I'm not suggesting a hardware limit, my suggestion is to avoid a Rybka v Rybka book war played by eg. Hiarcs and Sjeng. I saw you write in the Rybka forum that maybe not draws but only winning lines to be added to the book. The trouble is that no-one knows any winning lines from the start position. If you have some I am sure Anand and Topalov would be interested in talking to you
the book is part of the engine, you can't amputate it
Good input, but you know that many top opening book authors find the moves that go into these books using a combination of engines other than the engine that is playing with it? (Along with their chess skills). Like in the Sjeng-Hiarcs 50 move game in book, this was forged out of 1000's of Rybka v Rybka hours on the Playches server. So I don't really agree that the book is part of the engine, in actual fact you are playing moves found by other engines from this book.
Isn't this exactly what human GMs do? Use software for opening preparations?
garybelton wrote:
I don't think that one follows the other and I'm not suggesting a hardware limit, my suggestion is to avoid a Rybka v Rybka book war played by eg. Hiarcs and Sjeng. I saw you write in the Rybka forum that maybe not draws but only winning lines to be added to the book. The trouble is that no-one knows any winning lines from the start position. If you have some I am sure Anand and Topalov would be interested in talking to you
We should be more worried about the engines stealing Rybkas code. The only book rule that could be enforced is a limit to the length of book lines.
Ultimately for online tournaments like this, there's no foolproof way of enforcing the rules. Competitors could lie about what program they're running and what hardware they're running it on or steal their opponent's kibbitz information, and it's very hard to tell.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't have rules about these things, though--we just have to rely on the participants' sense of honor and fair play while taking what precautions we can. Therefore, the fact that book rules could be circumvented doesn't mean that we should abandon the idea of rules that limit book use.
Aaron Becker wrote:Ultimately for online tournaments like this, there's no foolproof way of enforcing the rules. Competitors could lie about what program they're running and what hardware they're running it on or steal their opponent's kibbitz information, and it's very hard to tell.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't have rules about these things, though--we just have to rely on the participants' sense of honor and fair play while taking what precautions we can. Therefore, the fact that book rules could be circumvented doesn't mean that we should abandon the idea of rules that limit book use.
I did not say we should just that the only sensible one that can easily be enforced is a limit to the book length and that might be a good idea.
my suggestion is to avoid a Rybka v Rybka book war played
Rybka vs Rybka War will be stopped probably after when we will see at least 2-3 engines equal in strength near to Rybka
I saw you write in the Rybka forum that maybe not draws but only winning lines to be added to the book
I have mentioned also that (for creating a successful strong book) the draw games must be imported up to 20-30 moves book depth too
If you have some I am sure Anand and Topalov would be interested in talking to you
Good ...and i have many strong book moves lines,but i will prefer to share my knowledge with Carlsen, Magnus
And here is my original posting in Rybka forum:
Both engines in book up to move 50. How on earth do you call that a computer match ?
Maybe after 50th move ... the both engines are started to use the endgames
Anyway in my opinion ( in case of running a such important tournament),only the book's winning games should be allowed to play up to 50 or 100 moves book depth
The draw games should be imported up to 20-30 moves book depth
Note:not only the hardware speed,but also the opening book plays a very important role to destroy the opponent
(of course it depends on what kind of book you are using)
Last edited by Sedat Canbaz on Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
